Inviting disaster
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Help us improve the site
Forum Description: Help us improve the forums, and the site as a whole
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=19097
Printed Date: February 24 2025 at 06:13
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Inviting disaster
Posted By: cobb
Subject: Inviting disaster
Date Posted: February 16 2006 at 18:10
These two appear to be at odds with each other... The home page contains many reviews of proto-prog groups with a progressive masterpiece rating. If they are not prog how can they be a progressive masterpiece? Someone is trying to have their cake and eat it. I refer to the owners, not the reviewers. |
Replies:
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: February 16 2006 at 18:46
I have raised this issue several times. I'm usually ignored or derided! ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
cobb wrote:Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: February 16 2006 at 19:55
|
That is a good point you raised about the rating of proto-prog albums,ashamed to say I never thought of it that way. Don't agree with your comment about the site owners though. -------------  |
Posted By: cobb
Date Posted: February 16 2006 at 20:05
| The comment about the owners is in no way meant to be derogatory, just pointing out that you can't have both and expect it to work, unless you change the way band releases are rated. |
Posted By: progaeopteryx
Date Posted: February 16 2006 at 22:46
|
I went to the Top 500 chart and only found 8 proto-prog titles listed. Deep Purple's Machine Head was the highest at #130. There are two prog-related in the top 100, but I think they're both special cases as they were the "proggiest" releases from those two bands (Supertramp and Alan Parsons Project). I see you're point though. It would be weird if the Beatles ended up in the top 10. It probably wouldn't bother me much, but I could see the poopies hitting the fan for some folks. |
Posted By: krusty
Date Posted: February 17 2006 at 07:05
I just think we should ignor Snowdogs post or possibly even use it as an object of ridicule. I don't think proto-prog or prog-related should be included in the review section. Simple as that... ------------- http://www.humanism.org.uk/site/cms/contentChapterView.asp?chapter=309" rel="nofollow - Humanism |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: February 17 2006 at 08:45
|
It is a valid concern, but it has not materialised with other "marginal" bands who have been added to date. I believe the balance of our reviews will always ensure that the cream of prog rises to the top.
|
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: February 17 2006 at 09:02
It is high time that the words added to the stars were scrapped, as I've said many times. Any album listed here should be able to qualify for top marks as a piece of MUSIC. The words added to the ratings cause the clash Cobb has pointed out, above (many reviewers seem to ignore them) and they are subjective/open to interpretation, in any case. I want only MY carefully-chosen words (not someone else's generic ones) to accompany my review. Let the review address the rating!
And where are our half stars? ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: February 17 2006 at 09:26
|
I shall ignore that remark!
Oh no paradox! I haven't ignored it.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: krusty
Date Posted: February 17 2006 at 11:03
|
^ ------------- http://www.humanism.org.uk/site/cms/contentChapterView.asp?chapter=309" rel="nofollow - Humanism |